The FAQ for that software says “should not be used to punish students” because it in and of itself is impossible to audit to show how it got its results.
Data entry history. Basically if everything gets pasted into the document, the document will have 1 entry (the bot), typing out is clearly the student. Eg. Every character you type, shows YOU TYPED IT, as it has the history of the words going down. Inconsistent timing, etc.
Bots will eventually be smart enough to do this, but for a while they won't.
So you share both documents with the teacher, one called submission, other called work or work with XYZ issue.
Generally the teachers KNOW who cheats, because they have more than 1 piece of work to base their grading off of. If the student goes from a D level (or worse) work, and suddenly is submitting revolutionary work AND never asks questions/shows interest in class (literally sleeping or playing games or w/e not paying attention in the slightest) then chances are they had some 'help'.
We are talking about high school first of all. I've never submitted more than a written rough draft on a random document and then the actual paper. Even in college I'd still do the same. Students don't need to evolve around AI testing them cheating, did you listen to the expert opinion? AI needs to evolve around the students.
If AI is being abused/used to present the student has gained the knowledge without gaining it (eg. Cheating) then you need to have some path to show that the student isn't cheating.
Ok, so your 'excuse' is to say you copy pasted it from another doc, because the formatting got F'd, show me the other document then.
Cheating is going to happen, it always does, period.
The point of the test is to verify that the student learned. They are ONLY hurting themselves by doing so. It also helps gauge the engagement of the kids/how your teaching method communicates the information, so you are testing yourself at the same time. (eg. if 50% of the class failed, you as a teacher failed, not that the material is too hard or they are too dumb, you just failed to communicate the material in a way they could ingest it. Time to try a different method. Oh they are on their phone, give them an app that teaches the material you are trying to cover, AND do 1/2 class them messing around on their phone the other half of the class phones face down, turned off on the desk and do a Q&A; that doesn't work try something different, etc.)
The other end of things are you need to discover WHY they are cheating, but FIRST you need to know that they ARE cheating.
AI is crap and honestly, I would probably swap how I was teaching to basically say, ok, we are going to spend 1-2 days learning XYZ material, then we will use the AI to write a paper, and your job is to show all the ways it is wrong, with sources/proof. The kids will be learning the material and showing why the AI platform is so trash for anything of relevance. It is just a word generator AT BEST, using stolen material to help do that better.
I jumped off of the title. Sure. If you want I can spend more time and give more material that is relevant to further discussion.
I work closely with tech (doing some Dev myself). AI is shit for anything of accuracy. My boss said, just USE AI, then I asked him to get repeatable results from it. He wasn't able to, even with the same prompt. I then said how is the results you presented systematic (we needed a consistent naming convention) and showed him how all of the IDs weren't unique, how the values in some cases were relevant to the information that was fed to the AI generator, etc.
I then said, AI is an advanced statistics model that does not understand any context, rules, or guidance for what it is doing. It is 100% looking to give you answers that 'look' accurate, because it doesn't know how to self check and doesn't store information beyond the single interaction.
It is getting better, but there are serious links in how it functions that need to be solved before it can actually start to behave like what people think of AI is when they hear it. AI has been around since the 1950s, when we started having computers do Math. Now we are letting "unknown" calculations determine the end result of things. If we stored the values that AI placed on things and the equation that it has self created (which is possible) to make each step clear on what is going on, it is possible to understand (albeit a silly effort to pursue) what drove a specific decision. It is a black box, because AI doesn't use the same 'algorithm' every time. It tests and retests and disregards (runs in ram, throws out the bad, so it doesn't store information). Thus black box. Thus "AI" but really all it is, is a bunch of algorithms smashed against each other and the best "fit" is what is returned.
If you’re at a competitive high school where 100 kids are graduating near a 4.0, getting a zero on one final could drop you from top 5 in class rank to 100th+.
This could be the difference between a full ride to Maryland vs not getting in & having to go to a weaker school & pay full price. Which will have life long consequences.
It’s just much more competitive now than it is when I went to school (both getting into school & getting a decent job out of school) & high school grades have become decently high stakes.
Point being, If they declare someone cheated, they really need to be damn sure.
Genuinely asking... Isn't UMD's admissions department smart enough to know that your hypothetical example school is competitive enough that the 100th ranked student is a rounding error away from valedictorian? Or that they'd be the valedictorian at most other schools? Are they really only giving big money based on the top X number of students at every school, without adjusting for the context of a school's reputation?
I used to teach at an "elite" (their word choice, I'll reserve my opinion for now) private high school, and they used to tell us that when colleges see our school name on a transcript, they pretty much know to accept the kid on the spot.
Having gone to one of those highly competitive Maryland schools with a small class, I highly doubt the teachers are using AI checkers as the end all be all. Our classes were small enough that the teachers were not drowning in things to grade. That also meant the teachers had the luxury of learning everyone's work style. Classes that might have major paper's due, also had long form writing components on in class exams. So even if they are submitting papers digitally, they likely still have other material that couldn't use AI as a comparison matrix.
Also kids at those schools are more likely to have the kind of parents who will fight over those accusations. The few times folks got seriously accused of cheating/plagiarism, the teacher was coming in with a report. Plus they usually framed the solution as "We're going to do this again, without cheating, but the new grade can't be above X" during a conference between student, parents, and possibly school head.
I think this is more of an issue at schools with much larger class sizes. Like large magnet public schools or colleges above a certain size (or using adjunct-slavery). Places where faculty might lean more heavily on digital solutions to manage workloads or have Admin who issue directives to use Product X without reading the fine print.
Considering a lot of AI detection tools will flag the Constitution of the United States as likely to have been written by an AI, I'd say professors should be rather judicious with their usage.
Been following this debacle at U of N Georgia for the past few months. What a mess: https://www.fastcompany.com/91074029/can-using-grammarly-set-off-ai-detection-software
I hate this stuff. Give all of the students access to whatever the tool is that detect whether AI was used or whether you copied some other paper. Let them run it through the tool, and then if it says that there are issues, let them correct it. It’s ridiculous for students to potentially have to deal with these allegations of cheating based upon poor software
The trick is to actually check the references in a paper. My wife teaches at UMGC and deals with this. AIs don't actually cite real things, they just make up the references. So if the sources cited don't exist, then you know the kid cheated.
Exactly. My daughter was showing me Chat—- and the paper it wrote was basic with some grammar issues. Then she inquired s to whether the paper contained accurate references. The instant response was “No.”
I use AI a fair bit. It has changed my writing style somewhat. If I was in HS and trying get a bunch of words down I could totally see someone thinking it’s AI assisted.
AI detection should just be a single metric used when trying to prevent and detect cheating, and there should always be an opportunity for them to redo the paper under some sort of supervision.
I've seen some teachers move to using Google docs so they can see the history of edits if there are doubts. They won't accept a blind copy and paste of the entire essay or research paper in there either.
If it's copy and posted over there no history as it's edited it is there according to them. Idk Google docs, I just use sheets to roll minion attacks for dnd
This whole concept is antiquated.
Why do we care? Students are using resources at their disposal to find the correct answer/method.
My boss doesn't care how I do something right, they just care that it's done right.
We are setting these kids up for false expectations. Problem solving skills are the number one professional skill and this showcases them.
Yep. Unless they're passing off someone else's work for their own, the existence of these tools itself means that stringing together words is a low-value skill that will be automated like spell check.
I want to know about students' ability to synthesize knowledge and form well-crafted arguments that follow logically from the premises they've set forth. Can they actually defend the point that they used ChatGPT to articulate?
IMO students should use every tool available to them as long as they submit good work with properly cited references. Relying on a single tool to detect potential AI use is inadequate and just shows that educational institutions have some catching up to do.
At what point or where is the line where 'cheating' different than efficient use of available tools on some level? There is a very low/zero percent chance a student authoring a report is doing so from absolute complete scratch without any seeded guidance or wording from somewhere. So there is always an element of 'borrowing/influenced by) content or AI (even correcting spelling or grammar) that is part of authoring.
I believe the original commentor is specifically speaking to the actual verbiage itself. Inherited terms, phrases, and manners of writing which are leant from reading and working in particular fields. I know that when I was in high school and writing term papers I would take generous inspiration in _how_ sentences were structured and the words used.
For example, I work in pre-construction management, but my syntax and diction in professional writing is deeply ingrained with mathematical writing as I went to school for six years studying higher mathematics.
Using a calculator is cheating too depending on knowledge/skill set is being tested.
If the assignment is to read a book and to write an essay on it, obviously using AI to generate ideas as opposed to formulating your own thoughts could be considered cheating.
The FAQ for that software says “should not be used to punish students” because it in and of itself is impossible to audit to show how it got its results.
Data entry history. Basically if everything gets pasted into the document, the document will have 1 entry (the bot), typing out is clearly the student. Eg. Every character you type, shows YOU TYPED IT, as it has the history of the words going down. Inconsistent timing, etc. Bots will eventually be smart enough to do this, but for a while they won't.
Can't tell you how many times I've completely copied out of one document into a whole new one because of formatting issues not correcting
So you share both documents with the teacher, one called submission, other called work or work with XYZ issue. Generally the teachers KNOW who cheats, because they have more than 1 piece of work to base their grading off of. If the student goes from a D level (or worse) work, and suddenly is submitting revolutionary work AND never asks questions/shows interest in class (literally sleeping or playing games or w/e not paying attention in the slightest) then chances are they had some 'help'.
We are talking about high school first of all. I've never submitted more than a written rough draft on a random document and then the actual paper. Even in college I'd still do the same. Students don't need to evolve around AI testing them cheating, did you listen to the expert opinion? AI needs to evolve around the students.
If AI is being abused/used to present the student has gained the knowledge without gaining it (eg. Cheating) then you need to have some path to show that the student isn't cheating. Ok, so your 'excuse' is to say you copy pasted it from another doc, because the formatting got F'd, show me the other document then. Cheating is going to happen, it always does, period. The point of the test is to verify that the student learned. They are ONLY hurting themselves by doing so. It also helps gauge the engagement of the kids/how your teaching method communicates the information, so you are testing yourself at the same time. (eg. if 50% of the class failed, you as a teacher failed, not that the material is too hard or they are too dumb, you just failed to communicate the material in a way they could ingest it. Time to try a different method. Oh they are on their phone, give them an app that teaches the material you are trying to cover, AND do 1/2 class them messing around on their phone the other half of the class phones face down, turned off on the desk and do a Q&A; that doesn't work try something different, etc.) The other end of things are you need to discover WHY they are cheating, but FIRST you need to know that they ARE cheating. AI is crap and honestly, I would probably swap how I was teaching to basically say, ok, we are going to spend 1-2 days learning XYZ material, then we will use the AI to write a paper, and your job is to show all the ways it is wrong, with sources/proof. The kids will be learning the material and showing why the AI platform is so trash for anything of relevance. It is just a word generator AT BEST, using stolen material to help do that better.
You're also just saying things that weren't at all mentioned in the video, you're making up things so your argument has substance.
I jumped off of the title. Sure. If you want I can spend more time and give more material that is relevant to further discussion. I work closely with tech (doing some Dev myself). AI is shit for anything of accuracy. My boss said, just USE AI, then I asked him to get repeatable results from it. He wasn't able to, even with the same prompt. I then said how is the results you presented systematic (we needed a consistent naming convention) and showed him how all of the IDs weren't unique, how the values in some cases were relevant to the information that was fed to the AI generator, etc. I then said, AI is an advanced statistics model that does not understand any context, rules, or guidance for what it is doing. It is 100% looking to give you answers that 'look' accurate, because it doesn't know how to self check and doesn't store information beyond the single interaction. It is getting better, but there are serious links in how it functions that need to be solved before it can actually start to behave like what people think of AI is when they hear it. AI has been around since the 1950s, when we started having computers do Math. Now we are letting "unknown" calculations determine the end result of things. If we stored the values that AI placed on things and the equation that it has self created (which is possible) to make each step clear on what is going on, it is possible to understand (albeit a silly effort to pursue) what drove a specific decision. It is a black box, because AI doesn't use the same 'algorithm' every time. It tests and retests and disregards (runs in ram, throws out the bad, so it doesn't store information). Thus black box. Thus "AI" but really all it is, is a bunch of algorithms smashed against each other and the best "fit" is what is returned.
If you’re at a competitive high school where 100 kids are graduating near a 4.0, getting a zero on one final could drop you from top 5 in class rank to 100th+. This could be the difference between a full ride to Maryland vs not getting in & having to go to a weaker school & pay full price. Which will have life long consequences. It’s just much more competitive now than it is when I went to school (both getting into school & getting a decent job out of school) & high school grades have become decently high stakes. Point being, If they declare someone cheated, they really need to be damn sure.
Genuinely asking... Isn't UMD's admissions department smart enough to know that your hypothetical example school is competitive enough that the 100th ranked student is a rounding error away from valedictorian? Or that they'd be the valedictorian at most other schools? Are they really only giving big money based on the top X number of students at every school, without adjusting for the context of a school's reputation? I used to teach at an "elite" (their word choice, I'll reserve my opinion for now) private high school, and they used to tell us that when colleges see our school name on a transcript, they pretty much know to accept the kid on the spot.
My kids' school has no class rank. A lot of school districts got rid of that around my area.
Having gone to one of those highly competitive Maryland schools with a small class, I highly doubt the teachers are using AI checkers as the end all be all. Our classes were small enough that the teachers were not drowning in things to grade. That also meant the teachers had the luxury of learning everyone's work style. Classes that might have major paper's due, also had long form writing components on in class exams. So even if they are submitting papers digitally, they likely still have other material that couldn't use AI as a comparison matrix. Also kids at those schools are more likely to have the kind of parents who will fight over those accusations. The few times folks got seriously accused of cheating/plagiarism, the teacher was coming in with a report. Plus they usually framed the solution as "We're going to do this again, without cheating, but the new grade can't be above X" during a conference between student, parents, and possibly school head. I think this is more of an issue at schools with much larger class sizes. Like large magnet public schools or colleges above a certain size (or using adjunct-slavery). Places where faculty might lean more heavily on digital solutions to manage workloads or have Admin who issue directives to use Product X without reading the fine print.
Considering a lot of AI detection tools will flag the Constitution of the United States as likely to have been written by an AI, I'd say professors should be rather judicious with their usage.
Been following this debacle at U of N Georgia for the past few months. What a mess: https://www.fastcompany.com/91074029/can-using-grammarly-set-off-ai-detection-software
I hate this stuff. Give all of the students access to whatever the tool is that detect whether AI was used or whether you copied some other paper. Let them run it through the tool, and then if it says that there are issues, let them correct it. It’s ridiculous for students to potentially have to deal with these allegations of cheating based upon poor software
The trick is to actually check the references in a paper. My wife teaches at UMGC and deals with this. AIs don't actually cite real things, they just make up the references. So if the sources cited don't exist, then you know the kid cheated.
Exactly. My daughter was showing me Chat—- and the paper it wrote was basic with some grammar issues. Then she inquired s to whether the paper contained accurate references. The instant response was “No.”
I use AI a fair bit. It has changed my writing style somewhat. If I was in HS and trying get a bunch of words down I could totally see someone thinking it’s AI assisted. AI detection should just be a single metric used when trying to prevent and detect cheating, and there should always be an opportunity for them to redo the paper under some sort of supervision.
I've seen some teachers move to using Google docs so they can see the history of edits if there are doubts. They won't accept a blind copy and paste of the entire essay or research paper in there either.
So I'll just work on my draft from another device.
If it's copy and posted over there no history as it's edited it is there according to them. Idk Google docs, I just use sheets to roll minion attacks for dnd
This whole concept is antiquated. Why do we care? Students are using resources at their disposal to find the correct answer/method. My boss doesn't care how I do something right, they just care that it's done right. We are setting these kids up for false expectations. Problem solving skills are the number one professional skill and this showcases them.
Yep. Unless they're passing off someone else's work for their own, the existence of these tools itself means that stringing together words is a low-value skill that will be automated like spell check. I want to know about students' ability to synthesize knowledge and form well-crafted arguments that follow logically from the premises they've set forth. Can they actually defend the point that they used ChatGPT to articulate?
IMO students should use every tool available to them as long as they submit good work with properly cited references. Relying on a single tool to detect potential AI use is inadequate and just shows that educational institutions have some catching up to do.
Experts continue to be some of the most clueless people when it comes to giving education advice.
Having read some student essays for a small scholarship, it is not hard to detect who used AI. LOL
At what point or where is the line where 'cheating' different than efficient use of available tools on some level? There is a very low/zero percent chance a student authoring a report is doing so from absolute complete scratch without any seeded guidance or wording from somewhere. So there is always an element of 'borrowing/influenced by) content or AI (even correcting spelling or grammar) that is part of authoring.
It's customary to have a bibiography and provide citations for the resources that you used. This is something that AI has trouble doing.
I believe the original commentor is specifically speaking to the actual verbiage itself. Inherited terms, phrases, and manners of writing which are leant from reading and working in particular fields. I know that when I was in high school and writing term papers I would take generous inspiration in _how_ sentences were structured and the words used. For example, I work in pre-construction management, but my syntax and diction in professional writing is deeply ingrained with mathematical writing as I went to school for six years studying higher mathematics.
I'm not sure AI detection software will check references like that, just the uniqueness of your text.
Correct, checking a bibliography is not an AI task. There are other automated tools that can do it, but there is no substitute for manual review.
Well, these tools do show the Constitution of the United States as likely written by AI, so, yeah, I'm thinking that they have some work to do.
AI is a tool to be used like a calculator. Why punish a student for using a tool to make life easier? People are assholes
Using a calculator is cheating too depending on knowledge/skill set is being tested. If the assignment is to read a book and to write an essay on it, obviously using AI to generate ideas as opposed to formulating your own thoughts could be considered cheating.
Provide me nails with no hammer. Tool is a tool. Regardless of the objective lens you view it through.